I wonder why the NYT has an issue with Ambassador Haley’s remarks at UN Security Council

Why is the NYT defending the actions of Iranian leadership and military?

From Ambassador Haley; 10/18/17

Thank you, Mr. President.

Our goal in discussing the Middle East is to work on peace, security, and human rights for the region. We can’t talk about stability in the Middle East without talking about Iran. That’s because nearly every threat to peace and security in the Middle East is connected to Iran’s outlaw behavior.

For the international community’s engagement with Iran, this is a time of clarity and opportunity. The United States has now embarked on a course that attempts to address all aspects of Iran’s destructive conduct, not just one aspect. It’s critical that the international community do the same.

Every six months, the Secretary-General delivers a report on the implementation of Security Council Resolution 2231, which the Council unanimously passed. The report has always noted the IAEA’s findings that Iran is implementing the nuclear deal. But then it goes on: it lists the regime’s multiple, flagrant violations on the resolution’s non-nuclear provisions. Every six months, the Security Council is presented with this laundry list of bad news, but somehow manages to only hear the good news. Some countries, to their credit, have called out Iran for its malign behavior. But as a Council, we’ve adopted a dangerously short-sighted approach.

Judging Iran by the narrow confines of the nuclear deal misses the true nature of the threat. Iran must be judged in totality of its aggressive, destabilizing, and unlawful behavior. To do otherwise would be foolish.

This clarity brings opportunity. It gives the Council the chance to defend its integrity. It gives us the chance to work together as a community of nations to uphold the provisions of resolutions we have all worked so hard to pass. The Security Council has repeatedly passed resolutions aimed at addressing Iranian support for terrorism and regional conflicts. But Iran has repeatedly thumbed its nose at those efforts.

Worse, the regime continues to play this Council. Iran hides behind its assertion of technical compliance with the nuclear deal while it brazenly violates the other limits on its behavior. And we have allowed them to get away with it. This must stop.

The list of the Iranian regime’s violations of Security Council resolutions is too long to repeat here. So I will confine myself to the highlights.

Resolution 2231 bans the transfer of conventional weapons from Iran. Yet today we see Iran identified as a source of weapons in conflicts across the region, from Yemen to Syria and Lebanon. The United States, France, Australia, Ukraine, and others have intercepted Iranian shipments of rocket-propelled grenade launchers, machine guns, and anti-tank missiles, among other weapons, that are bound for Yemen.

The Iranian regime has been a key source of arms and strategic military support to the Houthi rebels, both directly, through its military, and indirectly, through its Hizballah proxy forces. Not only is this a violation of Resolution 2231, it also violates Resolution 2216, which imposes an arms embargo on the Houthi rebels. Iran has repeatedly and brazenly violated not one but two UN Security Council resolutions in Yemen. And yet few on this Council have said anything at all.

Resolution 2231 also bans travel outside Iran by senior Iranian officials, including Major General Soleimani. And yet the Secretary-General’s report lists multiple press photos and reports of the general traveling to Syria and Iraq. You can even find pictures on social media of him visiting Russia. This is an open and direct violation of Resolution 2231. And yet, where’s the outrage of this Council?

There’s more. Plenty more.

In Resolutions 1701 and 1559, the Council unanimously called on Hizballah to disarm. Nonetheless, Hizballah is building an arsenal of war in Lebanon with weapons supplied by Iran. Again, none of this is going on in secret. The leader of Hizballah talks openly about the support Iran provides. He has reportedly boasted that sanctions can’t hurt Hizballah because “everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, come from the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

And these are only the Iranian regime’s activities on which the Security Council has taken a clear position.

What about Iran’s support of arms, financing, and training and fighters to the bloody Assad regime in Syria? And there’s the consistent Iranian threats to freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf. And there’s the Iranian regime’s cyber attacks against the United States, Israel, and other UN Member States. And then there’s Iran’s imprisoning of foreign journalists and tourists on made-up charges. Some Americans, like Bob Levinson, have not been heard from in over a decade.

Unfortunately, we’re not done yet. The Iranian regime abuses its own people. It imprisons or murders political opposition. It persecutes Christians and other religious minorities. It denies freedom of speech. It executes gays and lesbians.

And there’s one more thing. The list of Iran’s dangerous and destructive behavior that I just outlined does not even include the regime’s most threatening act: Its repeated ballistic missile launches, including the launch this summer of an ICBM-enabling missile – that should be a clarion call to everyone in the United Nations. When a rogue regime starts down the path of ballistic missiles, it tells us that we will soon have another North Korea on our hands. If it is wrong for North Korea to do this, why doesn’t that same mentality apply to Iran?

With our decision to take a comprehensive approach to confronting the Iranian regime, the United States will not turn a blind eye to these violations. We have made it clear that the regime cannot have it both ways. It cannot consistently violate international law and still be considered a fit and trusted member of the international community.

This Council now has the opportunity to change its policy toward the Iranian regime. I sincerely hope it will take this chance to defend not only the resolutions, but also peace, security, and human rights in Iran.

Thank you.


Ok, so what did she say that was inaccurate? Nothing.

Did she use offensive langugage? No.

Did she use personal attacks against Iranian leadership?  No.

Why is it that the NYT is defending the actions and leadership of Iran?

NYT example 1

NYT example 2

NYT example 3

NYT example 4 in ref to Haley’s comments

Algemeiner commentary about NYT 1

Algemeiner commentary about NYT 2

Google Manipulates Searches on Islam and Jihad

Google IS HELPING an organized disinformation campaign about the truths of the religion of Islam.

Source: Google Manipulates Searches on Islam and Jihad

2 cents:
Google, like Facebook, strive to inform the masses only that which is aligned to their “culturally elite” beliefs.
Wouldn’t it be great if all of the people who voted for President Trump, decided to no longer access/use the powerful organizations of the LEFT such as Google, Facebook and AMAZON.
Wouldn’t our unity against these organizations bring them down a few pegs? Wouldn’t our behavior based on our convictions detrimentally impact these moguls and their bottomline? 
What will it take to unify us who believe in the founding principles of our nation such as that of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? What will it take for us who believe in the 2nd Amendment to cease from purchasing from Amazon and/or to remove our “storefronts” from Amazon?
In my way of thinking, a conviction is only true/real if it is followed by the correct form of behavior. If it isn’t, aren’t we just convenient hypocrites?

CNN: Trump Won Because People Were Tired of Cultural Elites

Source: CNN: Trump Won Because People Were Tired of Cultural Elites

2 cents:

“People like us…”
Arrogance and ignorance of CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, according to him, he and the “Cultural Elites” are so much more intelligent and wiser than the people who voted for President Trump. Not my words, HIS by implication of what he said in the report.

MSM etc. are culturally elite over me, you and the rest of the people who voted for President Trump. You self-righteous fool!

Yes we did FINALLY fight back, because…

  • the Establishment is wrong.
  • MSM is wrong.
  • TPTB are wrong.

 

A possible explanation to Nunes’ actions: 47 HARD DRIVES AND 600M PAGES OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION ACQUIRED

It seems even more apparent to me that Nunes’ actions were because he realized the congressional committees supposedly involved in the matters about surveillance and intelligence collection were actually complicit in the activities by O’s administration and the FBI and NSA etc.

At this link you will see the letter and backstory to the actions of Mr. Klayman who is the Chairman and General Counsel of Freedom Watch, Inc. which ALREADY HAS THE EVIDENCE THAT O’s administration and alphabet-soup agencies were surveying and collecting private intelligence on for example of prominent Americans, such as the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, 16 judges, prominent businessmen, and others such as President Donald Trump. Note – these apparently are individuals who would disagree with O and his liberal democrats who were busy changing the USA into an unsafe socialist country which encouraged the illegal immigration of extremist-muslims from all over the world and illegal immigrants via Mexico.

Our government has become willingly hijacked because of the ignorant and stupid voting practices of the citizens of the USA in electing O for two terms.

Understand this: if you voted for Trump to be President of the USA it may very well be that your senator and representative are cunningly working to undermine his presidency and his agenda which we have elected him to do. We all need to put almost unbearable pressure on our congress members to fully back him and work to get things fixed in our country. TPTB will be throwing BIG $$$ behind Congress members who are anti-Trump and in essence anti-USA. We need to push back harder than when we pushed back against them in the recent presidential election.

 

Did you see the stories yesterday of individuals on the intelligence committee and other Congress members exasperating and swirling innuendo about the actions of Nunes in not consulting them before going to Trump and to citizens of the country. You know why? SUPPRESSION OF THE FACTS WAS NOT ACCOMPLISHED!

By their fruits you shall know them: the anti-semitic resolution

Below is the latest column from Charles Krauthammer and it is in ref to the anti-semitic resolution recently passed in the UN.

“Ye shall know them by their fruits.” the Lord Jesus Christ quoted in Matthew 7:16

The two so-called legacies of CES’ foreign policy negatively impact the Jewish nation of Israel.

Also the recent CES action and press release in ref to supposed connection of Russia with election and the kicking out of Russia diplomats was the administration’s way to change the news cycle/focus from their anti-semitic actions of the past week into something else so MSM will fill the airwaves/internet with liberal propaganda tied to their LOSS in the presidential election.

Emphasis added below by me…

 

By Charles Krauthammer Opinion writer December 29

“When the chips are down, I have Israel’s back.”

— Barack Obama, AIPAC conference, March 4, 2012

 

The audience — overwhelmingly Jewish, passionately pro-Israel and supremely gullible — applauded wildly. Four years later — his last election behind him, with a month to go in office and with no need to fool Jew or gentile again — Obama took the measure of Israel’s back and slid a knife into it.

People don’t quite understand the damage done to Israel by the U.S. abstention that permitted passage of a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel over settlements. The administration pretends this is nothing but a restatement of long-standing U.S. opposition to settlements.

For the first time in 36 years, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution critical of Israel’s Jewish settlements on Palestinian territory. The United States abstained. (Reuters)

Nonsense. For the past 35 years, every administration, including a reelection-seeking Obama himself in 2011, has protected Israel with the U.S. veto because such a Security Council resolution gives immense legal ammunition to every boycotter, anti-Semite and zealous European prosecutor to penalize and punish Israelis.

An ordinary Israeli who lives or works in the Old City of Jerusalem becomes an international pariah, a potential outlaw. To say nothing of the soldiers of Israel’s citizen army. “Every pilot and every officer and every soldier,” said a confidant of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, “we are waiting for him at The Hague,” i.e. the International Criminal Court.

Moreover, the resolution undermines the very foundation of a half-century of American Middle East policy. What becomes of “land for peace” if the territories that Israel was to have traded for peace are, in advance, declared to be Palestinian land to which Israel has no claim?

The peace parameters enunciated so ostentatiously by Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday are nearly identical to the Clinton parameters that Yasser Arafat was offered and rejected in 2000 and that Abbas was offered by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2008. Abbas, too, walked away.

Kerry mentioned none of this because it undermines his blame-Israel narrative. Yet Palestinian rejectionism works. The Security Council just declared the territories legally Palestinian — without the Palestinians having to concede anything, let alone peace. What incentive do the Palestinians have to negotiate when they can get the terms — and territory — they seek handed to them for free if they hold out long enough?

The administration claims a kind of passive innocence on the text of the resolution, as if it had come upon it at the last moment. We are to believe that the ostensible sponsors — New Zealand, Senegal, Malaysia and a Venezuela that cannot provide its own people with toilet paper, let alone food — had for months been sweating the details of Jewish housing in East Jerusalem.

In major speech, outgoing U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry defends the U.S. abstention of a U.N. resolution vote that demanded Israel end settlement building, saying the vote reflected U.S. values and was intended to defend the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. (Reuters)

Nothing new here, protests deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes: “When we see the facts on the ground, again, deep into the West Bank beyond the separation barrier, we feel compelled to speak up against those actions.”

This is a deception. Everyone knows that remote outposts are not the issue. Under any peace, they will be swept away. Even right-wing Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who lives in one of these West Bank settlements, has stated publicly that “I even agree to vacate my settlement if there really will be a two-state solution.” Where’s the obstacle to peace?

A second category of settlement is the close-in blocs that border 1967 Israel. Here, too, we know in advance how these will be disposed of: They’ll become Israeli territory and, in exchange, Israel will swap over some of its land to a Palestinian state. Where’s the obstacle to peace here?

It’s the third category of “settlement” that is the most contentious and that Security Council Resolution 2334 explicitly condemns: East Jerusalem. This is not just scandalous; it’s absurd. America acquiesces to a declaration that, as a matter of international law, the Jewish state has no claim on the Western Wall, the Temple Mount, indeed the entire Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem. They belong to Palestine.

The Temple Mount is the most sacred site in all of Judaism. That it should be declared foreign to the Jewish people is as if the Security Council declared Mecca and Medina to be territory to which Islam has no claim. Such is the Orwellian universe Israel inhabits.

At the very least, Obama should have insisted that any reference to East Jerusalem be dropped from the resolution or face a U.S. veto. Why did he not? It’s incomprehensible — except as a parting shot of personal revenge on Benjamin Netanyahu. Or perhaps as a revelation of a deep-seated antipathy to Israel that simply awaited a safe political interval for public expression.

Another legacy moment for Barack Obama. And his most shameful.